ADA Access and Emergency Egress Question

[palikona]

I'm designing a 3000 SF single story sprinklered commercial building that will house a dentist. The building has two emergency exits; one out the front through the main waiting room and out to the parking lot where there are ADA spaces located directly in front. The other exit is on the other side of the building. There is a sidewalk around the building but there needs to be stairs due to a grade change. The main entry/exit is ADA accessible and is the shortest route to the ADA spaces.

Does that second exit need to be ADA accessible as well? How do I determine that?

 

[arwat23]

Is the second exit a required exit? If yes, then it needs to be accessible per IBC 1009.1.

 

[RLGA]

Is the second exit required due to occupant load or exceeding the common path of egress travel (CPET), or just provided for convenience? If the latter, then only one accessible means of egress is required per IBC Section 1009.1. If a second means of egress is required due to occupant load or CPET distance, the second door is a required accessible means of egress. Thus, the accessible means of egress must be an accessible route to the public way, an area of refuge, or an exterior area for assisted rescue per IBC Section 1009.2.

 

[palikona]

So the occupant load for the building is 32 ppl. I believe per IBC Table 1006.2.1 we only need 1 exit, since the load is under 50 for B? Am I reading that correctly?

 

[walker.t]

So the occupant load for the building is 32 ppl. I believe per IBC Table 1006.2.1 we only need 1 exit, since the load is under 50 for B? Am I reading that correctly?

With only 32 occupants you meet the first requirement for a single exit (maximum occupant load of 49 occupants.) Next you have to confirm that the maximum common path of egress travel distance is acceptable, per Table 1006.2.1 the limit is 100’ because you said the building is sprinklered.

 

[arwat23]

So the occupant load for the building is 32 ppl. I believe per IBC Table 1006.2.1 we only need 1 exit, since the load is under 50 for B? Am I reading that correctly?

As long as the path of egress travel complies with table 1006.2.1, then the second exist is not a "required" exit. Only requires exists need to be accessible.

 

[palikona]

With only 32 occupants you meet the first requirement for a single exit (maximum occupant load of 49 occupants.) Next you have to confirm that the maximum common path of egress travel distance is acceptable, per Table 1006.2.1 the limit is 100’ because you said the building is sprinklered.

The max common path of egress travel distance is 75', so I'm covered there as well.

 

[Joe.B]

Required or not I would seriously consider adding an area of refuge. It should be a minimal design addition, and it could save any future development a lot of trouble. If the occupant load were to increase and require the second egress, then someone would have to rebuild it then. But that's not a requirement and just because something is a good idea doesn't mean you have to do it.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Don't forget all the signage required like directions to the accessible exit at the non accessible exits.

 

[walker.t]

Required or not I would seriously consider adding an area of refuge. It should be a minimal design addition, and it could save any future development a lot of trouble. If the occupant load were to increase and require the second egress, then someone would have to rebuild it then. But that's not a requirement and just because something is a good idea doesn't mean you have to do it.

I’ve worked with a developer in the past who would definitely take your advice, it would give him more options in the future when the tenant moves out, that flexibility also adds value to the building when it is sold.

but there needs to be stairs due to a grade change

I assume the grade change is so great that you just can’t ramp the change in grade.

The building has two emergency exits; one out the front through the main waiting room and out to the parking lot where there are ADA spaces located directly in front. The other exit is on the other side of the building.

You might consider making sure the exit doors are remotely located, per 1007.1.1 Exception 2 they would have to be separated by one-third the diagonal because your building is sprinklered. This would give you the option to have a future occupancy or occupant load that requires two means of egress without adding a new door.

 

[palikona]

All - thank you.
I will definitely have the door but the grading around the building is what is driving the question. Basically once you exit out of this door, you have the option of going right or left and wrapping around the building back to the parking lot. The site drops away on the back and sides past the wraparound sidewalk. If you exit out of this second exit and go left, the distance to reach the parking lot is shorter than if you were to exit right. But due to grading, the sidewalk to the left will need steps down and there isn't enough room/length to provide for a 1:12 ramp. The sidewalk to the right is ADA accessible, but the route around the building is twice as long. That shouldn't be a problem, right? Is there a maximum travel distance to get to a public way once you’re outside of the building?

 

[arwat23]

All - thank you.
I will definitely have the door but the grading around the building is what is driving the question. Basically once you exit out of this door, you have the option of going right or left and wrapping around the building back to the parking lot. The site drops away on the back and sides past the wraparound sidewalk. If you exit out of this second exit and go left, the distance to reach the parking lot is shorter than if you were to exit right. But due to grading, the sidewalk to the left will need steps down and there isn't enough room/length to provide for a 1:12 ramp. The sidewalk to the right is ADA accessible, but the route around the building is twice as long. That shouldn't be a problem, right? Is there a maximum travel distance to get to a public way once you’re outside of the building?

Shouldn't be a problem. The rear exit does not need to be accessible, so no accessible route from/to the parking lot to the main entry is required. If you want to play it as safe as possible, then do what Joe.B recommends and have an area of refuge in the back. You then have an accessible rear exit and don't need to do a ton of extra work.

Edit: That said, you have an accessible route. Not an ideal one... but one, nonetheless. If it's a "sidewalk", one along a street (as opposed to a parking lot or back ally), then it's my understanding that once you hit that you're good.

 

[RLGA]

All - thank you.
I will definitely have the door but the grading around the building is what is driving the question. Basically once you exit out of this door, you have the option of going right or left and wrapping around the building back to the parking lot. The site drops away on the back and sides past the wraparound sidewalk. If you exit out of this second exit and go left, the distance to reach the parking lot is shorter than if you were to exit right. But due to grading, the sidewalk to the left will need steps down and there isn't enough room/length to provide for a 1:12 ramp. The sidewalk to the right is ADA accessible, but the route around the building is twice as long. That shouldn't be a problem, right? Is there a maximum travel distance to get to a public way once you’re outside of the building?

There is no travel distance limitation to the exit discharge.

 

[walker.t]

The sidewalk to the right is ADA accessible, but the route around the building is twice as long. That shouldn't be a problem, right?

That’s a good question, unfortunately I haven’t worked on a project where the distance of a less-than-direct accessible route through the exit discharge has come up. I don’t know if you’d have to provide an accessible route that is equal in convenience to (as short as) the non-accessible route. My guess is at a minimum you’d want to add a sign indicating that the sidewalk to the right is the accessible route to the public way.

If you want to play it as safe as possible, then do what Joe.B recommends and have an area of refuge in the back. You then have an accessible rear exit and don't need to do a ton of extra work.

If you decide to make the rear exit accessible you’ll also want to make sure the sidewalk from the exit door to the public way is sized to provide the minimum width or required capacity for the exit door (per 1028.2.)

If it's a "sidewalk", one along a street (as opposed to a parking lot or back ally), then it's my understanding that once you hit that you're good.

As long as it’s really an alley (a public parcel and not just a gap on the private property between the building and a property line) that would be OK (I assume that was what you meant.) But because the parking lot is more than likely not “deeded, dedicated, or permanently appropriated to the public for public use” (Chapter 2 definition of “public way”) then that sidewalk around the parking lot would have to lead to a public way.

 

[Yikes]

I'm designing a 3000 SF single story sprinklered commercial building that will house a dentist. The building has two emergency exits; one out the front through the main waiting room and out to the parking lot where there are ADA spaces located directly in front. The other exit is on the other side of the building. There is a sidewalk around the building but there needs to be stairs due to a grade change. The main entry/exit is ADA accessible and is the shortest route to the ADA spaces.

Does that second exit need to be ADA accessible as well? How do I determine that?

Just to confirm - - is this design a new building and new parking lot? Or is any of it existing?
Where is the building located; or more specifically, what is the applicable code?

 

[ArtC]

Hello to All,
I know this is an old thread but I am have something similar to this. I understand that if occupant load requires two exits, both should be accessible. Can an exterior stairs with enough room at stair landing for an area of refuge, a valid solution?
Thank you.
Art

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Hello to All,
I know this is an old thread but I am have something similar to this. I understand that if occupant load requires two exits, both should be accessible. Can an exterior stairs with enough room at stair landing for an area of refuge, a valid solution?
Thank you.
Art

Yes, but it's not called an area of refuge, it's called an exterior area of rescue assistance. It has to meet certain criteria.

1009.7.1 Size. Each exterior area for assisted rescue shall be sized to accommodate wheelchair spaces in accordance with Section 1009.6.3

1009.7.2 Separation. Exterior walls separating the exterior area of assisted rescue from the interior of the building shall have a minimum fire-resistance rating of 1 hour, rated for exposure to fire from the inside. The fire-resistance-rated exterior wall construction shall extend horizontally not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) beyond the landing on either side of the landing or equivalent fire-resistance-rated construction is permitted to extend out perpendicular to the exterior wall not less than 4 feet (1219 mm) on the side of the landing. The fireresistance-rated construction shall extend vertically from the ground to a point not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) above the floor level of the area for assisted rescue or to the roof line, whichever is lower. Openings within such fire-resistancerated exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with Section 716.

Exception: The fire-resistance rating and opening protectives are not required in the exterior wall where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2

 

[arwat23]

I understand that if occupant load requires two exits, both should be accessible.

Depends. In California (I assume your project is there based on your location) in existing buildings that need to comply with Ch 11B, you are not required to make non-accessible means of egress accessible just because Ch10 calls for a certain number of exits. There's some seemingly conflicting sections of code, but the way I've always done it is by Ch11B and have never had an issue with any jurisdiction (so far). See CBC 11B-207.1, exception 3:

11B-207.1 General​

Diagram
Means of egress shall comply with Chapter 10, Section 1009 and Section 11B-207.
Exceptions:

1. Where means of egress are permitted by local building or life safety codes to share a common path of egress travel, accessible means of egress shall be permitted to share a common path of egress travel.
2. Areas of refuge shall not be required in detention and correctional facilities.
3. Accessible means of egress are not required to be provided in existing buildings.
4. Doors that provide access only to interior or exterior stairways shall not be required to comply with Section 11B-404.
5. Exits in excess of those required by Chapter 10, and which are more than 24 inches (610 mm) above grade shall not be required to comply with Section 11B-404 or be on an accessible route. Directional signs shall be provided in compliance with Chapter 10, Section 1009.10.

 

[steveray]

Depends. In California (I assume your project is there based on your location) in existing buildings that need to comply with Ch 11B, you are not required to make non-accessible means of egress accessible just because Ch10 calls for a certain number of exits. There's some seemingly conflicting sections of code, but the way I've always done it is by Ch11B and have never had an issue with any jurisdiction (so far). See CBC 11B-207.1, exception 3:

11B-207.1 General​

Diagram
Means of egress shall comply with Chapter 10, Section 1009 and Section 11B-207.
Exceptions:

1. Where means of egress are permitted by local building or life safety codes to share a common path of egress travel, accessible means of egress shall be permitted to share a common path of egress travel.
2. Areas of refuge shall not be required in detention and correctional facilities.
3. Accessible means of egress are not required to be provided in existing buildings.
4. Doors that provide access only to interior or exterior stairways shall not be required to comply with Section 11B-404.
5. Exits in excess of those required by Chapter 10, and which are more than 24 inches (610 mm) above grade shall not be required to comply with Section 11B-404 or be on an accessible route. Directional signs shall be provided in compliance with Chapter 10, Section 1009.10.

And to chase that all the way down...If it is new egress in an existing building, I say it meets "new" and accessible if required...But yankee has you on the right track for exterior stuff...

 

[ArtC]

Thank you for the responses.
Art